I don’t have a model. The point of my idea is to narrow down what model is needed (and where/how we can easily find it). The point of math language (“acasual trade” and “decision trees”) is the same.
Everything mentioned in the post is like a container. Container may not model what’s inside of it at all, but it limits the amount of places we need to check out (in order to find what we want). If we don’t easily find what we wanted by looking into the container (and a little bit around it), then my idea is useless.
Can anything besides useful math change your opinion in any way? I saw your post (Models Modeling Models, 1. Meanings of words):
When I say “I like dancing,” this is a different use of the word ‘like,’ backed by a different model of myself, than when I say “I like tasting sugar.” The model that comes to mind for dancing treats it as one of the chunks of my day, like “playing computer games” or “taking the bus.” I can know what state I’m in (the inference function of the model) based on seeing and hearing short scenes. Meanwhile, my model that has the taste of sugar in it has states like “feeling sandpaper” or “stretching my back.” States are more like short-term sensations, and the described world is tightly focused on my body and the things touching it.
I think my theory talks about the same things, but more and deeper. I want to try to prove that you can’t rationally prefer your theory to mine.
I don’t have a model. The point of my idea is to narrow down what model is needed (and where/how we can easily find it). The point of math language (“acasual trade” and “decision trees”) is the same.
Everything mentioned in the post is like a container. Container may not model what’s inside of it at all, but it limits the amount of places we need to check out (in order to find what we want). If we don’t easily find what we wanted by looking into the container (and a little bit around it), then my idea is useless.
Can anything besides useful math change your opinion in any way? I saw your post (Models Modeling Models, 1. Meanings of words):
I think my theory talks about the same things, but more and deeper. I want to try to prove that you can’t rationally prefer your theory to mine.